The Challenge to Religious Liberty in Indonesia

About the Author

The widespread growth of faith-based social movements over the
past two decades has convinced many observers of the significance
of religious activism as a driving force behind social change in
many parts of the globe. This is certainly the case in
Indonesia--the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation and,
since 1999, its third-largest democracy. Indonesian Islamic
activists have recently received considerable attention from
development organizations for encouraging participation in public
policymaking, promoting government accountability, and otherwise
contributing to democratic reform.

At the same time, the country's transition to democracy has been
marked by the emergence of powerful Islamic interest groups aiming
to dominate the legislative process, exert strict control over
Muslims' private lives, and diminish the rights of minorities. As
the government has been inconsistent in upholding constitutional
guarantees of religious freedom, it remains unclear whether
Indonesia's democratization process will continue to lead to
greater liberty for its citizens or encourage forms of Islamic
integralism that reject pluralism and ultimately deny individual
rights.

Deep Divisions. Since roughly 86 percent of Indonesia's
240 million people identify themselves at least nominally as
Muslim--approximating nearly two-thirds of the Muslim population of
the entire Arab League--it is not surprising that Islam has proved
to be one of the most potent sociopolitical forces influencing
public opinion and affecting the actions of the political elite.
Politicians and activist groups have frequently explained their
ideas in Islamic terms, employed Islamic symbols, and appealed to
the public in the name of their religion. Nevertheless, as
evidenced by the raucous debate over the position of Islam in
Indonesian society that has persisted since the reform period began
in 1998, deep divisions remain over the cultural identity of the
nation as well as the nature of the Indonesian state.

Within Islamic circles, two overlapping social movements have
vied ardently for dominance since the reform period began. The
first has called for the establishment of a pluralistic democracy
based on tolerance, social justice, and a strong civil society. The
second has promoted Islam as a political ideology aiming for
sectarian control of the state--a phenomenon referred to as
Islamism. Emphasizing moral reform, Islamists advocate the complete
Islamization of Indonesian society through the imposition of
Islamic law (sharia) on the nation's immense Muslim
population as well as the establishment of Saudi-style social norms
for the rest of the country.

The principal goal of this paper is to assess the Indonesian
government's performance in protecting basic rights and freedoms as
it faces a determined and multi-pronged effort to impose
religiously inspired restrictions on the population. It is also
intended to inform debate on U.S. policy toward Indonesia as the
Obama Administration begins to work out a new platform for
relations with countries where Islam is a cogent political
force.

Religious Persecution. Some of the most troubling
instances of religious violence involve the harassment of religious
minorities and the forcible closure of their places of worship. For
several years, Islamist militia groups have waged a systematic
campaign against minority Muslim groups whose interpretation of
Islam differs from the Sunni orthodoxy favored by militant
ideologues.

A few of these raids targeted Indonesia's tiny Shia community.
Most of the attacks, however, were directed at members of the
Ahmadiyah movement, who differ from the majority of Muslims in
their belief that the prophet Mohammed was not the last to speak
the word of God on Earth. One of the most troubling aspects of
these crimes is that local authorities did little to prevent the
attacks and failed to prosecute those responsible.

Words Matter. For his part, President Obama has
repeatedly declared his intentions to forge better relations with
Muslim-majority nations around the globe. He seeks to reach Muslims
directly through public diplomacy efforts and has demonstrated a
serious interest in broadening dialogue with Muslim leaders.
Unfortunately, the President's choice of words in describing his
otherwise laudable plans to engage Muslim populations is
problematic for Indonesians. In his first interview as President
conducted with Al Arabiya television news on January 27, 2009,
President Obama reminded viewers that he has lived in "Muslim
countries"--specifically in Indonesia, which he describes as the
largest country in the "Muslim world."

Having attended school in Indonesia, President Obama need not be
reminded that Indonesia does not officially call itself a "Muslim
country." The Republic of Indonesia is a religiously diverse nation
based on the principles of Pancasila, which includes belief in God,
a just and civilized humanity, national unity, democracy through
deliberation, and social justice.

It is true that Indonesia is home to the world's largest
population of Muslims, with some 206 million of its 240 million
citizens describing themselves as followers of Islam. But unlike
some countries in the Middle East and South Asia where the
followers of other religions have been almost completely driven
out, Indonesia remains home to millions of Christians, Hindus,
Buddhists, and adherents of other faiths. President Obama's
reference to their homeland as a "Muslim country" is a
disappointment to these minorities, who have seen their nation's
tradition of tolerance come under attack from religious extremists.
It also ignores the efforts of countless Muslims who have struggled
to maintain Indonesia's non-sectarian orientation.

Conclusion. The Indonesia that President Obama knew as a
child, with its culture of pluralism and constitutional protections
for religious freedom, provides an important model of religious
diversity. His Administration should act quickly to support that
tradition. It can begin by sharply curtailing the use of rhetoric
that carelessly describes diverse regions based on the faith of
dominant groups.

Islamist propaganda aside, very few of the world's Muslims live
in societies that can be neatly labeled "the Muslim world." The
Palestinians and the Israelis may need a two-state solution to
overcome their trauma. One must hope that President Obama and other
world leaders will be more creative in forging an international
relations paradigm that will help transcend the dichotomies based
on religion that fuel so many ongoing conflicts.

Richard Kraince is Research Professor of Southeast Asian
Humanities at the College of Mexico in Mexico City.